Legal Opinion

Stowell v. Cloquet Co-Op Credit Union

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 16, 1997No. C4-95-1608PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STRINGER, Justice.

Plaintiffrrespondent Randall Stowell (“Sto-well”) brought this action in Carlton County District Court seeking to recover approximately $22,000 that had been paid by the defendant/appellant Cloquet Co-op Credit Union (“Credit Union”) over a ten-month period on checks forged on Stowell’s account by Stowell’s neighbor. The distinct court held that a Draft Withdrawal Agreement requiring Stowell to notify the Credit Union of any errors in his account statement within twenty days of the mailing of the statement was manifestly unreasonable and refused to apply the agreement…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hibbing Education Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Trondson v. JanikulaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  3. Parent Teacher Ass'n v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1988
  4. Kiernan v. Union BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Terry v. Puget Sound National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1972

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. American Airlines Employees Federal Credit Union v. MartinTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Robinson Motor Xpress, Inc. v. HSBC Bank, USAAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  3. Union Planters Bank, Nat. Ass'n v. RogersMississippi Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Borowski v. Firstar Bank Milwaukee, N.A.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1998
  5. Peters v. Riggs National Bank, N.A.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API